Re: [v6ops] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on charter-ietf-v6ops-03-00: (with COMMENT)

[Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[e-mail]>]

Hi, Joel,

On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 12:32 PM, joel jaeggli <[e-mail]> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 8/17/15 9:20 AM, Spencer Dawkins wrote:
> > Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for
> > charter-ietf-v6ops-03-00: No Objection
> >
> > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to
> > all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to
> > cut this introductory paragraph, however.)
> >
> >
> >
> > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found
> > here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-v6ops/
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> COMMENT:
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >  This looks like a fine revised charter. I had slight uneasiness
> > about adding
> >
> > "2.  Solicit input from network operators and users to identify
> > operational interaction issues with the IPv4 Internet, and
> > determine solutions or workarounds to those issues."
> >
> > because I wondered if this will make v6ops more attractive for NAT
> > proposals, but if that's the right thing to do, please do the
> > right thing.
>
> Given the extent to which such proposals are viewed with suspicion I
> don't think that it's likely. to the extent that v6ops has concerned
> itself with this area in the past, it has involved operational use of
> work done in behave (464xlat), or largely  how to avoid stateful nats,
> deprecation of nat-pt, multihoming without nat (really homenet has
> that remit now).


That works for me.

And thanks for the confirmation.

Spencer